User talk:Toughpigs
A few notes Thanks for helping out so far. I'll try to add a welcome message when I see new editors. A big part of the Wiki I need help with is images. Some people are just taking them from other sites, and they don't always leave a note where they actually got the image, if they have permission to use it or anything. I don't know much about what is allowed or not, so I havent done much with them. RobJ1981 21:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC) :Also, is it possible for me to grant rollback rights (but not give admin status) to people on this Wiki? I'm not on as much as I would like, so if I can grant people those rights, it would help revert vandalism when I'm not around to check. RobJ1981 06:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC) ::Great, I think welcoming people will make a big difference! I just looked at the stats -- it looks like the wiki got some extra people coming by last week because of publicity about the Bella Twins. We made a new spotlight for the wiki that has the Bella Twins on it, and I'll see if we can build that page up. ::I have to say, I'm not super fussy about images myself. Wikipedia is very strict about images, but that's one site that can be managed and watched; on Wikia, there's hundreds of sites, and most of them are about subjects that tend to have copyrighted images. So for the most part, I just use whatever images I find, and if somebody writes to complain, then we take it down. That's only happened to me once -- an artist wrote to me to complain that I'd used an image from his professional portfolio. Big companies tend not to care. ::Yeah, it's possible to give somebody rollback rights, although you may need to be a bureaucrat to do it. I just gave you bureaucrat status -- I know Moe gave you sysop, but he's hardly been around since March, and you're clearly doing bureaucrat work. :) So go to , and you should see "rollback" as one of the rights that you can give to people. Let me know if you need anything else! -- Danny (talk) 18:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC) :::The main page looks better with latest news. One thing we need to do is add other promotions to it (Ring of Honor, TNA and so on), otherwise the site seems like it's mainly WWE. I moved the new articles to the left, but I'm not so sure if that works good. I was also thinking of adding a "this date in history" and/or "this month in history" section. However, the date section might be hard to manage if people aren't around to update each day. RobJ1981 22:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC) ::::Also, I forgot to mention: Bella Twins aren't the correct format we do on the Wiki though. See Shawn Michaels as one example. I did this format, because too many people just copy Wikipedia content and it use to look like just a copy of Wikipedia. A majority of articles are already at this format. What do you think should be done, the current format (a few paragraphs, basic information, plus the see also section for subpages) or something else? RobJ1981 22:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC) :::::Cool, I'm glad you like the main page! I agree with you about how hard it is to manage the "day in history" thing -- I did a daily thing on the main page of Muppet Wiki for years, and I finally had to give up... Too much pressure to do every day. So we came up with a new design that puts news stories and current pictures on the left, with a calendar of events on the right. I think it's good to have news on the main page, to make things seem fresh and alive when people come to the site -- but not to put dates on anything, so if you take a weekend off, it doesn't look abandoned. :::::I've brought that design over to the basketball sites I've been working on lately -- the Boston Celtics and Houston Rockets wikis. If you're interested, we could set up a design like that here too. There's always something interesting and dramatic going on in the wrestling world, so there's lots of material for the main page... You also may find that contributors get excited to bring the latest news to the site, if it'll end up featured on the main page. Let me know what you think... :::::I'm sorry that I didn't realize about the format. I guess I'm a little confused about the format -- it seems like it takes all the interesting story stuff off the page, and hides it somewhere else. It feels a little like saying that the only thing that should be on the Shawn Michaels page is the information in the infobox -- like, you can only have the height, weight and birthdate, and everything else has to be a subpage. :::::From what I can see, a couple days ago, TheWho87 took all of the interesting stuff off of the Shawn Michaels page and just deleted it. It makes sense to me to use the Wikipedia info as a base and then build on to it, so that ultimately this wiki is more complete and more informative than Wikipedia is. Taking that stuff out, it means that the wiki has less information than Wikipedia... you know what I mean? -- Danny (talk) 23:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC) ::I see my name and I guess people are talking bout me (that’s the only reason I’m putting this here), look here is the simple view, I came here and to be honest it was a mash of loads of different things, so I went out to clean up a lot of the topic into one simple layout which was simply to have the main info on the main page and have subpages for all information like detailed career history, event history and such, that means there are no massive long pages if you just want the info where if you want more depth you can go to the sub pages which are located near the bottom of the page, I thought the layout was simple and effective so I used it for X amount of pages, now for that Shawn Michaels page I will admit that I removed a lot of info but I was trying a quick fix, if I had the time I would of gone through all that and turned it into the career page (which I tend to do unless I’m formatting loads of pages which I do) and since there is a lot of things there that needed changing I thought it would be simple to remove, plus remember these pages have been up ages already so it was not exactly recent. ::Also people think that they can just rip things off wikipedia and put them here and its done, that’s not true I for one have been trying very hard to give this place some originality that’s why I might make some brutal edits but that’s to give this place an edge over what else is out there. ::Sorry for interrupting I just thought best to give you my view since your talking bout me lol.--TheWho87 :::Yeah, no disrespect meant -- didn't mean to talk about you behind your back. :) :::I guess I don't see the problem with long pages... I like long pages. When a new reader clicks on the Bella Twins spotlight and comes to the Bella Twins page, then I think they'd expect to see the information on that page -- not just some facts and then a list of subpages. You're asking people to make extra clicks to get the information that they want, rather than just give them the info where they are. -- Danny (talk) 00:30, 25 November 2008 (UTC) ::::If we just do the same format as Wikipedia, we might as well just copy and paste every wrestling article and stick it here. Seriously, how would that be useful? If people want to see that format: they can go to Wikipedia. The main pages could be a little longer, but if they get excessively long: then it loads slowly for some people, and it just looks very cluttered. It's happened with many Wikipedia articles, and many times people just condense the article poorly and don't make subpages. As for TheWho just removing content: he should just be moving it to subpages, instead of quick fixing the page. I've had talks with him about doing things quickly in the past. He makes a lot of articles quick: but they are missing key details a majority of the time. The infobox should include both formats for height and weight, but he just uses one and think it's just alright. I bring it up to him, and he calls it just a "petty issue". Being complete isn't petty at all. Perhaps if TheWho would focus on making an article being more complete, then I wouldn't have to spend my time having to fix things so much. Anyway, back to the article size issue: perhaps a latest news section for all wrestler articles would help things out. Limit it to a paragraph or two relating to the past month or so. I don't see that as a big issue. RobJ1981 06:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC) ::::::I like the idea of a latest news section! I think it would be great to have some more content on those pages. -- Danny (talk) 01:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC) Forum discussion on formatting I've created Forum:Article format ideas, as a place for people to discuss how articles should be setup. If you have any suggestions or thoughts about the matter, post them there. RobJ1981 07:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC) I'm on IRC now Click on IRC channels, then Wikia (located right above the recent changes list). RobJ1981 21:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC) :Okay, I'm on IRC now. RobJ1981 20:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC) Wrestler articles appearing in the templates category See Category:Templates. Could this be fixed, before more articles are expanded with the new sections? RobJ1981 22:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC) Blog comment I suppose it's fine, as long as people don't overuse it. The main purpose of the Wiki is to contribute articles. RobJ1981 20:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Calendar comment The color scheme is just like WWE.com's calendar section. Different colors or just plain text would work much better. RobJ1981 02:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC) wiki additions i could suggest to you a page devoted to TNA and many other wrestling show on this wiki. i could also suggest that you create some pages on japanese wrestling promotions and independent curciuts. Main page issue How do I get rid of the top 10 from the main page? I'm fine with it staying in the left navbar, just not on the main page. I personally think it needs to go. This Wiki needs to branch out to more than just WWE, and a picture gallery of WWE wrestlers isn't helping matters. I tried removing it, but then the navbar on the left was messed up. RobJ1981 23:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC) :Nevermind, it's been fixed. RobJ1981 17:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC) ::People can see the top articles on the left bar though. I don't think we should jam in some non-WWE wrestlers in a top 10 if those pages don't get a lot of activity. Until the Wiki gets more activity, all of the top views/top edited pages will be WWE most likely....so a top 10 for WWE makes the Wiki look too focused on that company. Perhaps the main page could spotlight current wrestlers as well as past stars. I havent had the time to work on it yet, but I was thinking of a "this month in history" section on the main page. It wouldn't need a lot of maintenance, as long as we have it detailed before we place it at the start of each month. With that on the main page, we can use pictures of the certain wrestlers that had historical moments for the current month. Perhaps even some pictures of famous matches as well for the this month in history section. Personally, I think a history section on main page, with some current news would be better than the format of current news and top 10 (which is too WWE-based). The Johnny Walker article is looking decent, but could use more pictures. Then you could put that in the Wiki spotlight possibly. I wouldn't be opposed to older wrestlers in the spotlight at times. I'll have to do some checking and see if anything else is good enough for spotlight yet. RobJ1981 19:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC) Category galleries Is it possible to edit the new category galleries that have been added in. becuase i would like to do that. or do you have to be an administrator to do it? Rangerkid51 17:20, December 7, 2010 (UTC) :The category galleries are automatic -- they pull the eight pages that have been viewed the most in the last 30 days. So you'll see the selections change when something happens in the wrestling world to make different wrestlers popular! -- Danny (talk) 17:49, December 7, 2010 (UTC)